The un private video can be found here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLbTsMYUtBU&start=459
Never mind. Wrong Video.
Can someone confirm @bufferunderrun's claim in #39 that there was no webcam and no mic in the now deleted video? If so "her" statements that she was not cheating was made as written comments to here youtube video?
I do find it a little strange that someone who wants to reach a big audience with videos and streams wouldn't use a face cam or a microphone to be able to speak with the viewers since it draws a bigger crowd, but there is several videos of that sort uploaded by her before so that makes it less suspicious.
This is a hard one to wrap my head around. I see no reason for Pähtz to cheat. The financial gains she would have gotten even if she won the tournament must be minuscule compared to what she has to lose both from a financial and social standpoint. On the other hand the explanation given is pretty far fetched in itself. Why would someone as part of her team cheat in such an obvious way against players with much higher rating and why would they write an obviously racist comment if they wanted to help "raise [her] online profile and brand"? And did that person not think Pähtz would find out about it? I also find it a little hard to believe that she has so much revenue from chess and chess related social media content she can afford to pay a team (even though I guess they are paid to to perform smaller tasks and aren't employees paid a monthly salary).
In any case it is very good that Lichess is totally vindicated in the site's actions against the account.
I do find it a little strange that someone who wants to reach a big audience with videos and streams wouldn't use a face cam or a microphone to be able to speak with the viewers since it draws a bigger crowd, but there is several videos of that sort uploaded by her before so that makes it less suspicious.
This is a hard one to wrap my head around. I see no reason for Pähtz to cheat. The financial gains she would have gotten even if she won the tournament must be minuscule compared to what she has to lose both from a financial and social standpoint. On the other hand the explanation given is pretty far fetched in itself. Why would someone as part of her team cheat in such an obvious way against players with much higher rating and why would they write an obviously racist comment if they wanted to help "raise [her] online profile and brand"? And did that person not think Pähtz would find out about it? I also find it a little hard to believe that she has so much revenue from chess and chess related social media content she can afford to pay a team (even though I guess they are paid to to perform smaller tasks and aren't employees paid a monthly salary).
In any case it is very good that Lichess is totally vindicated in the site's actions against the account.
I was watching. I am pretty sure that there was no mic; she never spoke during the stream and she communicated with chat by text only. I am not sure about a webcam though.
@moulin "In any case it is very good that Lichess is totally vindicated in the site's actions against the account."
I'm not here to defend her but I do think the argument should be presented fairly.
Her explanation of events did not involve any attempt to refute that her account was used to cheat another player in a tournament. Lichess banned her for reasons that are not in conflict with her side of the story and Lichess did not consider the extenuating circumstances of her professional life, accounts on other platforms, etc. relevant to their decision.
She thanked Lichess.
So what exactly was "vindicated"?
I'm not here to defend her but I do think the argument should be presented fairly.
Her explanation of events did not involve any attempt to refute that her account was used to cheat another player in a tournament. Lichess banned her for reasons that are not in conflict with her side of the story and Lichess did not consider the extenuating circumstances of her professional life, accounts on other platforms, etc. relevant to their decision.
She thanked Lichess.
So what exactly was "vindicated"?
@clutchnutz Prior to her statement there has been some speculation about what happened and that Lichess maybe wrongfully banned her account. Her or her impersonator seems to have said so in the comments to the youtube video for example and some user comments on reddit thought Lichess got it wrong. So with vindicated I mean Lichess's decision to close the account was proven justified.
The statement feels like bullshit to me.
But even i it's true, Lichess is fuly justified in closing down the account and voiding the account.
Other sites like chess24 or chess.com also should look at the games of this person in detail and take action if they see similar patterns.
But even i it's true, Lichess is fuly justified in closing down the account and voiding the account.
Other sites like chess24 or chess.com also should look at the games of this person in detail and take action if they see similar patterns.
@moulin Vindication against baseless speculation is worth something I suppose. 😉
Regardless, my only point is that the issue being contested is not whether or not her account was used with computer assistance but whether or not her account was compromised and sadly, it does not appear that Lichess considers that relevant. Though, I'm not sure how realistic it would be for them to consider that type of appeal anyway.
Hopefully FIDE has the resources to consider the other circumstances because as unusual as it may be, it would be unacceptible if someone's career was destroyed over poor management decisions or a lack of 2FA.
Regardless, my only point is that the issue being contested is not whether or not her account was used with computer assistance but whether or not her account was compromised and sadly, it does not appear that Lichess considers that relevant. Though, I'm not sure how realistic it would be for them to consider that type of appeal anyway.
Hopefully FIDE has the resources to consider the other circumstances because as unusual as it may be, it would be unacceptible if someone's career was destroyed over poor management decisions or a lack of 2FA.
I dont see cheating in those games. and observation that some one made mirror moves of engine recomendations does explain why some moves are great other blunders. She was in violation of Lichess terms of service by sharing the account. sharing password = sharing account.
Then again I wonder what the hell german federatin and FIDE are doing? Tournament was not sanctioned by them nor was part their activity. They just dont have "jurisdiction" here. Not anymore if someone cheats/insults/whatnot in a home game
Then again I wonder what the hell german federatin and FIDE are doing? Tournament was not sanctioned by them nor was part their activity. They just dont have "jurisdiction" here. Not anymore if someone cheats/insults/whatnot in a home game
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.